From the work at hand. The RBR team and factory workers were curious, naturally, if their WDC was leaving earlier than they believed (and not an unheard of occurrence in F1, especially re: Ferarri) - and ultimately the whole team, including Seb, had to be bothered with the "hot storyline". Seb and then RBR got to spend a nice little stint denying the rumors, in and out of house, which had been "leaked" by the italian press in a timely manner. This was no one-weekend wonder you may recall, but indeed set off a little storm in the f1 press to the extent where it went from rumor to done deal (as this thread attests) - and Monty egged the situation on. The top RBR brass had to address Vettel about it, by their own admission, so it was a slick bit of PR work.

Go read post #1 of this thread - and a few more posts if you need to refresh your memory.

On the other hand, if they were in the same cars, and Fernando beat him? What would they say then?

By the way, I don't think this is going to happen, Alonso and Vet in same team.... Perhaps when Alonso retires.

Article that is being quoted suggested, that it was Alonso who vetoed Vettel as his potential, and presumably equal in status, team-mate. I do follow these stories for some time now, and I am yet to read once, that Vettel would place a condition upon Ferrari if they want him, then it's either him or Alonso, but not both. Myths can be shattered, but it is rather Alonso who has a lot more to loose should Vettel leave him in the dust.

From the work at hand. The RBR team and factory workers were curious, naturally, if their WDC was leaving earlier than they believed (and not an unheard of occurrence in F1, especially re: Ferarri) - and ultimately the whole team, including Seb, had to be bothered with the "hot storyline". Seb and then RBR got to spend a nice little stint denying the rumors, in and out of house, which had been "leaked" by the italian press in a timely manner. This was no one-weekend wonder you may recall, but indeed set off a little storm in the f1 press to the extent where it went from rumor to done deal (as this thread attests) - and Monty egged the situation on. The top RBR brass had to address Vettel about it, by their own admission, so it was a slick bit of PR work.

Go read post #1 of this thread - and a few more posts if you need to refresh your memory.

What 'work', though? What would this ever stop them from being able to do?

I would say that ferraris patience with alonso as a wdc waiting has also limits, these limits are gradually approached. Alonsos last chance is this season, 2014 will be new era and young vettel will have a edge, because his flexibility and renault engine. Renaults are less thirsty now so there is knowledge important for restricted fuel burning in 2014 engine regs.

I would say that ferraris patience with alonso as a wdc waiting has also limits, these limits are gradually approached. Alonsos last chance is this season, 2014 will be new era and young vettel will have a edge, because his flexibility and renault engine. Renaults are less thirsty now so there is knowledge important for restricted fuel burning in 2014 engine regs.

They only have reason do be "patient" with Alonso when he starts to squander good cars. Ferrari know very well that none of the cars Alonso had were of "must win WDC with this one" quality. As for the relative strengths of the different engines, it seems to me that much of the current ones might be accidental. Remember that the engines were originally designed for very different regulations. Trade-offs which may have been very reasonable in the refueling era, such as more power in exchange for needing a bit more fuel, may have turned into disadvantages, but that does not necessarily indicate what the respective engine teams are capable of.

They only have reason do be "patient" with Alonso when he starts to squander good cars. Ferrari know very well that none of the cars Alonso had were of "must win WDC with this one" quality. As for the relative strengths of the different engines, it seems to me that much of the current ones might be accidental. Remember that the engines were originally designed for very different regulations. Trade-offs which may have been very reasonable in the refueling era, such as more power in exchange for needing a bit more fuel, may have turned into disadvantages, but that does not necessarily indicate what the respective engine teams are capable of.

i would say that alonso has begun to lost his edge in last races of 2012 when he was "surprised" by massas return to form, he has a good car in the end.

Article that is being quoted suggested, that it was Alonso who vetoed Vettel as his potential, and presumably equal in status, team-mate. I do follow these stories for some time now, and I am yet to read once, that Vettel would place a condition upon Ferrari if they want him, then it's either him or Alonso, but not both. Myths can be shattered, but it is rather Alonso who has a lot more to loose should Vettel leave him in the dust.

The articles are made up, by people looking for something tasty to write. Any team mate of Alonso would have equal status until they no longer title contenders, just like Massa, so if vettel is as good as he thinks he is, he won't have a problem. I think Vettel would have a lot more to lose, if he got rolled by Fernando. Those 3 titles would quickly shrivel up and many peoples thoughts on Vettel would be confirmed. Total disaster. He won't go near Fernando, he knows how hard he is to beat even in a much slower car. Vettel is not stupid.

You don't understand how that can serve as a distraction to the team just as the championship is heating up? Well Horner, Seb and Didi did, so I would imagine you would just have to take the word of those who were distracted.

I also dont think Alonso has that much power within Ferrari or that this was such a serious business that Alonso and Ferrari had to renegotiate a contract around it.

Why are you shoehorning Alonso into the discussion of the press leak? I did not say anything about Alonso leaking the information in my post. I said it was a Ferrari press leak and that Monty egged on the situation.

It sounds more like the typical, generic villainization of Alonso that we hear plenty of.

If I wanted to villainize Alonso he has given me PLENTY of amunition over the years. I don't need to add speculative accusations against him and I didn't.

The only point regarding issue regarding Alonso is that one of his demands was that Vettel not be allowed to join the team. I am not surprised - I have never believed he wanted to deal with another #1 driver. And as I pointed out, I don't think it is an "all Alonso" thing as I have long believed it to be a Ferrari policy.

The only point regarding issue regarding Alonso is that one of his demands was that Vettel not be allowed to join the team. I am not surprised - I have never believed he wanted to deal with another #1 driver. And as I pointed out, I don't think it is an "all Alonso" thing as I have long believed it to be a Ferrari policy.

Massa was Ferrari number 1 and he dealt with him pretty easy. Any source for the claim Alonso demands Vettel not be allowed to join? Not including articles with no sources. Getting Vettel out of a redbull would be a great idea, and his best chance to win a title, unless Ferrari learn how to design good cars again.

The articles are made up, by people looking for something tasty to write. Any team mate of Alonso would have equal status until they no longer title contenders, just like Massa, so if vettel is as good as he thinks he is, he won't have a problem. I think Vettel would have a lot more to lose, if he got rolled by Fernando. Those 3 titles would quickly shrivel up and many peoples thoughts on Vettel would be confirmed. Total disaster. He won't go near Fernando, he knows how hard he is to beat even in a much slower car. Vettel is not stupid.

Sorry, but seeing Ferrari in race trim it didn't look to me very slow or inferior to RB. I might be in minority on this BB, but I am not buying all these outcries how Ferrari was inadequate to race at the front. Vettel has taken his RB to its limit or at least very close to it, as evidenced by his results. I am not so sure the same can be said about the other driver. On second point, current Ferrari was most likely designed around Alonso's driving style. Sebastian would be to certain extend in disadvantage jumping into a current car without some configuration changes, thus I remain unclear why Alonso would be objecting to partner Vettel, when he is holding all good cards in his hand at the moment.

Sorry, but seeing Ferrari in race trim it didn't look to me very slow or inferior to RB. I might be in minority on this BB, but I am not buying all these outcries how Ferrari was inadequate to race at the front. Vettel has taken his RB to its limit or at least very close to it, as evidenced by his results. I am not so sure the same can be said about the other driver. On second point, current Ferrari was most likely designed around Alonso's driving style. Sebastian would be to certain extend in disadvantage jumping into a current car without some configuration changes, thus I remain unclear why Alonso would be objecting to partner Vettel, when he is holding all good cards in his hand at the moment.

Firstly there is no evidence that Alonso is objecting to anything, other than an article with made up rumours. Secondly James Allen did an analysis that showed the Ferrari was 4th fastest car on race pace last year, not that it was needed considering it was so obvious. That's just pure numbers that you need to accept and nothing to do with out cries, so maybe you need to look again.

Firstly there is no evidence that Alonso is objecting to anything, other than an article with made up rumours. Secondly James Allen did an analysis that showed the Ferrari was 4th fastest car on race pace last year, not that it was needed considering it was so obvious. That's just pure numbers that you need to accept and nothing to do with out cries, so maybe you need to look again.

I doubt it. Like I said it was obvious anyway to anyone paying attention. Or maybe short memories only focus on the few races where Ferrari was quite competitive, and forgot the others where it was a slug.

I doubt it. Like I said it was obvious anyway to anyone paying attention. Or maybe short memories only focus on the few races where Ferrari was quite competitive, and forgot the others where it was a slug.

strange, because it was obvious to me that ferrari was 13th fastest last year. care to provide that analysis? I find it hard to believe that the f2012 was as good as 4th.

When this was the case with Schumi in 2006 or Kimi in 2009, Luca di Montezemolo did not refute. Now he did. So we will have Alonso@Ferrari until and including 2016 (unless he himself leaves and some clauses in the contract come to work) and possibly Seb@Ferrari from 2017 onwards. Whether with Adrian Newey or not.

What does it mean: possibly 7 WDC titles before Seb joins Ferrari. In the name of competition I hope not - it would be nice if Seb, Lewis and Fernando go on battling against each other, maybe all with 3, 4 WDC's in their bag. That rivalry would go down as one of the greatest in history (at the moment still the Senna-Prost rivalry is considered the greatest) and bring them all up in the eternal rankings.

Secondly James Allen did an analysis that showed the Ferrari was 4th fastest car on race pace last year, not that it was needed considering it was so obvious. That's just pure numbers that you need to accept and nothing to do with out cries, so maybe you need to look again.

The season ended months ago and Ferrari competitiveness keeps going down and down

Go get a clue, mate. There was nothing wrong with Ferrari on Sunday. It was overall as good as any other car on race day. And when Saturday comes into the equation, Ferrari drops to the 3rd fastest car of the season, and tied 2nd best. Don´t believe it? Have a look at the standings, the guys got 2nd in WCC despite having only one driver for more than half a season. Surely it can´t be that poor.

The season ended months ago and Ferrari competitiveness keeps going down and down

Go get a clue, mate. There was nothing wrong with Ferrari on Sunday. It was overall as good as any other car on race day. And when Saturday comes into the equation, Ferrari drops to the 3rd fastest car of the season, and tied 2nd best. Don´t believe it? Have a look at the standings, the guys got 2nd in WCC despite having only one driver for more than half a season. Surely it can´t be that poor.

You know full well that based on car speed, McLaren should have taken #2 in the WCC, the only thing that hindered them was the race team's ineptitude. I agree that the Lotus was not consistently faster than the Ferrari, but the odd Sauber, Williams, or FI was (depending on track).

There was not much wrong with Ferrari on Sunday except that they had to start 6th. Without that weakness, the Spa and Suzuka accidents probably wouldn't have happened, with obvious results.

You know full well that based on car speed, McLaren should have taken #2 in the WCC, the only thing that hindered them was the race team's ineptitude. I agree that the Lotus was not consistently faster than the Ferrari, but the odd Sauber, Williams, or FI was (depending on track).

There was not much wrong with Ferrari on Sunday except that they had to start 6th. Without that weakness, the Spa and Suzuka accidents probably wouldn't have happened, with obvious results.

The odd Sauber, Williams, FI and Lotus were also faster than Red Bull on several tracks, but you conveniently don't mention that.You also don't mention that there was not much wrong with Red Bull on Sunday, except that their alternators kept blowing up, which cost Vettel even more points.Funny you mention Spa btw, where Alonso started ahead of both Red Bulls.

The problem with this whole "Ferrari was 4th/7th/20th slowest car on the grid" movement, is that it is completely devoid of context, based on double standards and copy-pastes one situation onto the whole season.- Ferrari was horrible in Australia > Ferrari was horrible this whole year!- Sauber was faster than Ferrari in Spa > Ferrari was sometimes even slower than Sauber- Sauber was faster than Red Bull in Spa > ... Vettel and Webber sucked in Spa

The odd Sauber, Williams, FI and Lotus were also faster than Red Bull on several tracks, but you conveniently don't mention that.You also don't mention that there was not much wrong with Red Bull on Sunday, except that their alternators kept blowing up, which cost Vettel even more points.Funny you mention Spa btw, where Alonso started ahead of both Red Bulls.

The problem with this whole "Ferrari was 4th/7th/20th slowest car on the grid" movement, is that it is completely devoid of context, based on double standards and copy-pastes one situation onto the whole season.- Ferrari was horrible in Australia > Ferrari was horrible this whole year!- Sauber was faster than Ferrari in Spa > Ferrari was sometimes even slower than Sauber- Sauber was faster than Red Bull in Spa > ... Vettel and Webber sucked in Spa

Would love to see Vettel against one of the true greats of this era. Without Newey involved.

It would shut a lot of people up on here. It is a travesty that he has 3 titles, doesn't reflect his driving abilities, just the fact he has been sat in a Newey car for most of his career.

I'm glad to finally be educated about what a good car the Ferrari was this year too.

The season ended months ago and Ferrari competitiveness keeps going down and down

Go get a clue, mate. There was nothing wrong with Ferrari on Sunday. It was overall as good as any other car on race day. And when Saturday comes into the equation, Ferrari drops to the 3rd fastest car of the season, and tied 2nd best. Don´t believe it? Have a look at the standings, the guys got 2nd in WCC despite having only one driver for more than half a season. Surely it can´t be that poor.

Just about the size of it. Too much whining about the car and nailing one's self to one's cross, not enough just going racing. If you spend your time looking for excuses for not winning then you won't win.

You don't understand how that can serve as a distraction to the team just as the championship is heating up? Well Horner, Seb and Didi did, so I would imagine you would just have to take the word of those who were distracted.

No, I cant. If these guys are the least bit competent at their jobs, this shouldn't distract them from being able to do 'the work at hand'. You think a mechanic is going to forget to tighten a lug nut cuz they're thinking about whether or not Vettel will be there in a couple years or something? I'd really like to hear an explanation of what they were unable to do because of Ferrari's 'distraction'.

Why are you shoehorning Alonso into the discussion of the press leak? I did not say anything about Alonso leaking the information in my post. I said it was a Ferrari press leak and that Monty egged on the situation.

I didn't say anything about Alonso leaking anything, either. My point is that I'm very skeptical of this rumor because it assumes Alonso is some big decision maker within the team.

If I wanted to villainize Alonso he has given me PLENTY of amunition over the years. I don't need to add speculative accusations against him and I didn't.

I didn't say you were villainizing him, I'm saying thats what this rumor is. Just a stereotypical, lame "Alonso wont race against any other top driver" explanation that I would imagine seeing by some forumer on here.

There was not much wrong with Ferrari on Sunday except that they had to start 6th. Without that weakness, the Spa and Suzuka accidents probably wouldn't have happened, with obvious results.

The Ferrari was better on Sunday, but it still wasn't on par with the Red Bull and Mclaren for the most part. Lotus was quite often the faster car on Sunday as well. This idea that the Ferrari was an equal top car with the rest on Sunday is getting old.

Just about the size of it. Too much whining about the car and nailing one's self to one's cross, not enough just going racing. If you spend your time looking for excuses for not winning then you won't win.

Yup, the reason Alonso didn't win the championship last year was cuz he didn't race hard enough. lol

The odd Sauber, Williams, FI and Lotus were also faster than Red Bull on several tracks, but you conveniently don't mention that.

I thought it's obvious and still does not make Ferrari the 2nd-fastest car on average

You also don't mention that there was not much wrong with Red Bull on Sunday, except that their alternators kept blowing up, which cost Vettel even more points.

The topic was pace, not reliability, pit stops or whatever.

Funny you mention Spa btw, where Alonso started ahead of both Red Bulls.

You won't be able to make the RBR look worse than the Ferrari over the whole year, but by all means do keep trying.

The problem with this whole "Ferrari was 4th/7th/20th slowest car on the grid" movement, is that it is completely devoid of context, based on double standards and copy-pastes one situation onto the whole season.- Ferrari was horrible in Australia > Ferrari was horrible this whole year!- Sauber was faster than Ferrari in Spa > Ferrari was sometimes even slower than Sauber- Sauber was faster than Red Bull in Spa > ... Vettel and Webber sucked in Spa

The very fact that you try to make it seem like claiming that the Ferrari was the 7th slowest car is the same as claiming it was the 4th fastest car destroys your argument. Anyhow, I didn't claim any of this.

Alonso says yes to Vettel, but no to Hamilton, because he knows how good Lewis is.

That's also all you need to know about how much Alonso rates Vettel.

The real question is which of the reports floating around has the better sources and can actually be (somewhat) trusted.

It could also be that there has been some fallout between RB and Ferrari in general - it doesn't have to be about Alonso and Vettel only. It could also be that Ferrari wants Vettel, but can't before 2017.

No, I cant. If these guys are the least bit competent at their jobs, this shouldn't distract them from being able to do 'the work at hand'. You think a mechanic is going to forget to tighten a lug nut cuz they're thinking about whether or not Vettel will be there in a couple years or something? I'd really like to hear an explanation of what they were unable to do because of Ferrari's 'distraction'.

Nothing - as I said, it was a failed attempt. But that doesn't make the attempt any less contemptible.

The Ferrari was better on Sunday, but it still wasn't on par with the Red Bull and Mclaren for the most part. Lotus was quite often the faster car on Sunday as well. This idea that the Ferrari was an equal top car with the rest on Sunday is getting old.

Yup, the reason Alonso didn't win the championship last year was cuz he didn't race hard enough. lol

This board sometimes, I swear.

its not that Alonso didn't race hard enough, its just the team spent too much time complaining and looking for excuses. Time that if they had spent racing would probably have won them the championship. If you worked in the lower echelons of the team, you probably would swear.

The very fact that you try to make it seem like claiming that the Ferrari was the 7th slowest car is the same as claiming it was the 4th fastest car destroys your argument. Anyhow, I didn't claim any of this.

My point is you're using the same flawed, non-context, double-standard arguments.

For instance:

I thought it's obvious and still does not make Ferrari the 2nd-fastest car on average.

You're using this one argument to argue why Ferrari wasn't that fast, but somehow it can't be used to argue why Red Bull wasn't the super-duper-fast-rocket ship you claim it to be.How is that anything but a double standard

Alonso says yes to Vettel, but no to Hamilton, because he knows how good Lewis is.

That's also all you need to know about how much Alonso rates Vettel.

Funny thing...the same BBC author who had "impeccable sources" saying Alonso has given his "seal of approval" to have Vettel drive alongside him at the Scuderia, is now the one saying that Alonso has signed a contract with Ferrari FORBIDDING this from happening!

Funny thing...the same BBC author who had "impeccable sources" saying Alonso has given his "seal of approval" to have Vettel drive alongside him at the Scuderia, is now the one saying that Alonso has signed a contract with Ferrari FORBIDDING this from happening!

Whom to believe...Andrew Benson or Andrew Benson?

you know, there is this funny thing called chronology, I know, crazy but let's just imagine. there are posts about Alonso not vetoing Vettel back in september (couldn't care to go deeper as it is sufficient), in my book the end of the season was in november, so if Benson said "no veto" in september, they renegotiated in november, Benson says "veto" in february, then, as far as I know, he could be right in both cases, even though he says totally opposite things!yeah, I know, just crazy.

My point is you're using the same flawed, non-context, double-standard arguments.

For instance:

You're using this one argument to argue why Ferrari wasn't that fast, but somehow it can't be used to argue why Red Bull wasn't the super-duper-fast-rocket ship you claim it to be.How is that anything but a double standard

I am certainly not going to reiterate these well-known arguments for the fiftieth time, I know that you were around long enough and know them.

Funny thing...the same BBC author who had "impeccable sources" saying Alonso has given his "seal of approval" to have Vettel drive alongside him at the Scuderia, is now the one saying that Alonso has signed a contract with Ferrari FORBIDDING this from happening!

Whom to believe...Andrew Benson or Andrew Benson?

Maybe Alonso was ok before the Singapore GP when he was leading and Vettel seemed out of the WDC bid. Alonso would be 3xWDC and 1x by Ferrari and would welcome Vettel to the team since he would be in a much better position inside the team. Now that Vettel is 3xWDC and have a good chance to be 4xWDC till 2014, Alonso changed his mind.

@KnucklesAgain, you should read the debate between myself and @mnmracer in the pecking order thread. Then you'll know who you are debating him with.

He loves to contradict himself. He uses qualifying as his evidence that Mclaren were quicker than Red Bull this season, but then dismisses qualifying performance, and only looks at race pace when comparing Red Bull to Ferrari. It's a waste of time to debate with him.

@KnucklesAgain, you should read the debate between myself and @mnmracer in the pecking order thread. Then you'll know who you are debating him with.

He loves to contradict himself. He uses qualifying as his evidence that Mclaren were quicker than Red Bull this season, but then dismisses qualifying performance, and only looks at race pace when comparing Red Bull to Ferrari. It's a waste of time to debate with him.

I'm fighting you on your own terrain.

You're trying to make the Red Bull faster than both the Ferrari and the McLaren, and I show the flaw in both.I show you the flaw in using only qualifying as indicator for best car, and I show you the flaw in using only race pace as indicator for best car. The connection between the two is just in your head.You're just miffed that your arguments why the Red Bull was 100x better than any car and how Vettel should be ashamed for only just winning the championship, falls flat every team you measure the arguments by the same standard.

I rest in peace knowing I'm in agreement with basically everyone in and around F1 except a few Vettel fans with self esteem issues.

Every time I think "this one might be different", you all just fall back into the same routine.Now we're back to removing all context. You probably also think that the team-bosses vote meant that they thought Alonso was in a league of his own (fact-check: no, all it said was Alonso > Vettel; not Alonso is slightly better than Vettel, Not Alonso >>>>>>>>>>> Vettel, just Alonso > Vettel).

FACT: The expert consensus is that Ferrari was not the overall best car of 2012.FACT: The expert consensus is NOT that Ferrari was an uncompetitive car overall in 2012.FACT: The expert consensus is NOT that Red Bull was a dominant car overall in 2012.

There isn't even a consensus on whether the Red Bull was the best car of 2012, because McLaren screwed up so much.But sure, go make a mountain out of a molehill if that's what you need to rest in peace.

I rest in peace knowing I don't need to over exaggerate things to confirm what I think.I rest in peace knowing that I don't need to resort to double standards to feel right.I rest in peace knowing that I always have measurable facts and factual data on my side.